Why government regulators matter: A sports analogy

The NFL's replacement referees, pictured, offer an analogy for why good governance is a good idea. Jeff Bridge/US Presswire

By Stephen Hiltner

One seemingly bottomless source of national pessimism today is the notion that government can’t do anything right and that regulators are, by nature, the enemy of freedom and commerce. It’s enough to make one head to the Sports section, where there’s coverage of a much healthier relationship with governance.

Sports, in general, provides a fine analogy for what government’s role should ideally be. The athletes and their teams, motivated to beat the competition, bring to their game the same energy and creativity that entrepreneurs and businesses bring to the marketplace. But though the players and coaches may dispute a call now and then, they don’t make the mistake of perceiving regulation as the enemy. Rather, a good game requires clear rules and regulations that are fairly applied.

Boundaries in sports do not constrict action so much as channel it, challenging the players to refine their skills to make the most of the freedom and opportunities the game’s framework provides. Without a net and clear boundaries, tennis would never have produced the likes of a Roger Federer.

Similarly, manufacturers have responded to the combination of a competitive marketplace and rigorous government standards by greatly increasing the efficiency of appliances such as refrigerators, while also lowering costs. Environmental regulations, then, are falsely maligned when, in fact, they can motivate manufacturers to dramatically improve their products and save consumers money.

There must be many football fans who believe that the nation’s economy would thrive if only government regulations were slashed, and yet football itself is a celebration of rules and regulations. While under-regulated financial institutions were precipitating a financial meltdown in the fall of 2007, football fans were scrutinizing instant replays for the slightest infraction.

Earlier this season, pro football provided a definitive demonstration of what happens when governance is given short shrift. When the NFL replaced its union referees with high school and college refs who are used to slower-paced play, their incompetence damaged the game. The NFL essentially replicated an experiment conducted by President George W. Bush. By putting incompetent appointees in charge of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Bush set the stage for the botched government response to the devastation in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina.

Ideologies that equate regulation with tyranny, common in political discourse, sound bizarre when applied to the realm of sports. You don’t hear athletes quoting Ayn Rand and calling for the elimination of referees and boundaries in the name of freedom.

Nor is there any illusion that professional athletes will nobly police their own behavior. As football has increased in speed and complexity, the NFL has increased the number of referees from three to seven. Contrast this with calls by many politicians to get government out of the way of financial markets, even as the financial sector has exploded in size, complexity and speed.

But the importance of regulation and its consistent enforcement goes beyond ensuring an exciting, fair and well-paced competition, whether in sports or the marketplace. Particularly in football, good regulation also protects players from mutual destruction.

In some ways, chronic traumatic encephalopathy — the long-term consequence of repeated concussions — is to football what climate change is to a fossil fuel-based economy. Both are slow to manifest, eventually making normal life impossible. How does one save football when the violence it is based on puts players’ brains at risk? And how to save our economy when the fuels it is based on put the nation at ever-increasing risk of catastrophic changes in weather patterns?

Here, again, the sports world has proved to be more mature and reality-based than the political realm. As in the marketplace, the goal in football is not to rid the game of regulations, but to find the right balance. Too much regulation stifles creativity and slows the action. Too little breeds chaos and puts the players and the game itself at risk.

It is this aspect of the anti-government movement in our national political discourse that is most corrosive of the nation’s functioning and spirit. The constant questioning of government’s legitimate role in regulating society has the paradoxical effect of keeping government in the foreground, a bleeding sore that will not heal.

We need to get past this constant berating of government, acknowledge its vital role and work to refine its implementation so that it can hum along smoothly in the background.

Referees and regulators will never be loved. But there can be no doubt they are vital to the game. It’s time such an understanding spreads to our political discourse.